In his Wall Street Journal column Walter Russell Mead comments on the war brewing between Armenia and Azerbaijan:
Prospects for a cease-fire are poor. While Armenian diplomats frantically work the phones to gin up international support, Azerbaijan and Turkey demand an Armenian withdrawal and an apology as the price of peace.
For Mr. Erdogan, a victory in the Caucasus would be a personal triumph. Siding with the predominantly Shiite but ethnically Turkic Azeris against Christian Armenia is wildly popular with both religious and nationalist Turks. Victory would force Russia to take Ankara more seriously as a force in the region. It would increase Mr. Erdogan’s independence from the U.S. and enhance his credentials as the man who can revive the lost glories of the Ottoman caliphate.
Mr. Erdogan’s downside risks are also large, especially if Russia decides to settle with Turkey once and for all. But in an increasingly disorderly world, middle powers like Turkey must take their opportunities where they find them. The coming winter will likely be a bitter one for the civilians and conscripts caught up in a war that an enfeebled international system seems unwilling or unable to forestall.
The conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan is a proxy war but this time the big power opponents are not Russia and the U. S. but Russia and Turkey. Quite literally the only interest the U. S. has in this matter, other than the self-destructive urge to poke the Russian bear on our part, is Turkey’s membership in NATO.
I have been urging booting Turkey from NATO for some time. Simply stated Neo-Ottoman Turkey is a different country from the Kemalist Turkey that was one of NATO’s original members. That Neo-Ottoman Turkey is not our ally or our friend. The U. S., preferably along with other NATO members, should make it quite clear to Turkey that Turkish intervention in a war between Armenia and Azerbaijan will not trigger NATO’s mutual defense provision under any circumstances.
I don’t believe that either the Trump Administration or an incipient Biden Administration will do that and the U. S. risks being embroiled in a war that is not in our interest.
I believe the NATO treaty does not have a clause to expel or suspend a member.
Also, as long as NATO maintains thousands of troops and nukes at Incirlik; Erdogan is probably correct he has the rest of NATO over a barrel and can continue his adventurism.
“The coming winter will likely be a bitter one for the civilians and conscripts caught up in a war that an enfeebled international system seems unwilling or unable to forestall.”
I think this belies the conceit that that “international system” has more influence than it actually does.
Personally, I think the US should remove all of its tactical nukes from Europe. Their purpose is now is entirely for political reasons internal to NATO and no longer have anything to do with deterrence.
I continue to think it’s better to have Turkey in the alliance compared to the alternatives such as a Turkey militarily aligned with Russia, Islamist states, or even China. Plus, if Turkey wants to be a new Ottoman regional power, then leaving NATO is something it will want to do on its own at some point.
And I do agree that we should make it clear that blowback from Turkish adventurism won’t trigger NATO alliance obligations – the Turks are on their own.
‘I don’t believe that either the Trump Administration or an incipient Biden Administration will do that and the U. S. risks being embroiled in a war that is not in our interest.’
OMB has a proven track record of declining to intervene in new international conflicts. DeMentia has a track record of supporting them until they become unpopular with his base and then claiming he always opposed him. God knows what Harris would do. Whatever the Joko Obama suggests, I suppose.
‘Also, as long as NATO maintains thousands of troops and nukes at Incirlik; Erdogan is probably correct he has the rest of NATO over a barrel and can continue his adventurism.’
TarsTarkas Jeddak of Thark would pull everything out of Incirlik except one nuke which he would set off by remote control once the last plane leaving was at a safe distance. Drastic, I suppose; but then Green Barsoomians are like that.
Look at the map. Turkey is in NATO because it is the cornerstone to defending the Middle East and the Eastern Mediterranean. (Israel isn’t.) An independent Turkey would be a strategic defeat for us in the region. If Turkey were to ally with Russia (unlikely), our position in the Middle East would be untenable. Countries now aligned with us would have to align with Russia and Turkey, and maybe Iran.
No doubt Erdogan and the Turkish nationalists would like to rebuild the Ottoman Empire, which covered all of the Middle East (except Iran) plus Egypt and Libya. But that is not in the cards. Turkey does not have the power to build an empire, and there is a deep opposition in Muslim countries to its support for the Muslim Brotherhood, viz. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, UAE… This is most obvious in the Libyan conflict, where support for or against the Muslim Brotherhood identifies the alliances involved.
A rational policy for the US is to wait out Erdogan. He has poisoned promising relationships with Egypt, Israel, Syria, Iraq and even Russia and Iran. Turkey is really the odd man out in the Middle East. At some point Turkey will get a new regime, and it will have to mend fences with its former allies. The main US goal should be to prevent a Russian-Turkish-Iranian alliance. Erdogan is enough of a nut job the make that doable..
Looks like there are about three million Armenians, soon to be refugees. Wouldn’t they be a better fit than Syrians for Europe and her diversity?
The map only tells you how helpful Turkey might be not how helpful it is. Presently, Turkey is destabilizing just about every country to which it is adjacent, particularly Greece, Syria, and Armenia and a number of countries not adjacent to it in which it has interests, e.g. Cyprus. Their support for DAESH/Al Qaeda is only slightly more disturbing than our own.
I don’t think the NATO will get involved in this conflict directly.
The question is if Turkey oversteps; and Russia decides it needs to give Turkey a bloody nose. Russia and Turkey are on opposite sides in Syria/Libya, so Putin has motivation. How much of a bloody nose would NATO (i.e. whoever is in the White House) tolerate before it intercedes?
The Europeans may dislike Erdogan, but Turkey without a government presents a different set of problems.
If it keeps escalating, staying out will be tricky.